Pages 23-25 of “The value of Freedom – A Draft Fully costed Fiscal Plan for an Independent Alberta”
Upfront, I wish to state most emphatically that I seek an independent Alberta free of Carney’s Canada and free of the globalist overlords and their climate change, net carbon zero scam. The climate change narrative is a key part of Mark Carney’s “Values” – Building a Better World for All”. I want the latter to be totally expunged from the government of an independent Alberta; not a whiff to be found. Accordingly, I am extremely disappointed by the inclusion of this section in Alberta Prosperity Project’s Fiscal Plan.
To start, the inclusion of UN jargon, “Sustainability”, in the title for the section (and elsewhere) is problematic, as it brings to mind the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of which a key goal for the UN, #13, calls for “urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts”. https://sdgs.un.org/goals
Why all the busywork of calculating the abundance of different types of plant vegetation in Alberta (grasslands and forests) and their capacity to sequester carbon, when the opening statement talks of being “free from the constraints of the existing climate agenda” and a focus on the environment “without the narrow focus on carbon”?
I asked Jeff Rath these two questions on X:
“Does he believe 1) in man-made climate change caused by carbon dioxide emissions and 2) the necessity of reducing carbon dioxide emissions to achieve net carbon zero by 2050?” He replied, “I do not believe that man influences climate in any meaningful way. I don’t believe that Alberta needs to reduce CO2 in any way whatsoever. Last I checked CO2 was good for crops, forests and the vegetation that our wildlife needs to thrive”.
I was pleased by Jeff’s response. However, his response doesn’t compute with the “Sustainability and the Environment” section of the Fiscal Plan talking of a “pragmatic carbon strategy” which involves the natural “sequestering” of carbon and advocating steps to enhance that process in order to reach “climate goals”.
(See p. 25 of the Fiscal Plan:
“Summary of Strategy
– Carbon Offset: Sequester 10-33 Mt C/year, potentially offsetting up to 46% of Alberta’s emissions, contributing to climate goals.”)
As well, I was told by Rath, “No where do we suggest reducing emissions” and that I should “Reread the document”. I have carefully read the document. Quite the contrary, the document on page 25 (see above) talks about natural sequestering resulting in an “offset”, which according to an Oxford dictionary definition means “consideration or amount that diminishes (reduces) or balances the effect of a contrary one”.
Finally, when I responded to an APP post on X of the Draft Fiscal Plan document, saying to “Drop the section on climate change! My independent Alberta is FREE of Carney’s Canada and FREE of the globalist net carbon zero scam”, I was advised by Jeff to reread it, claiming that “The point is we have forests, grasslands and crop lands. We don’t need anything else! 😂”. With that comment, Jeff confirmed that he was talking about addressing climate change. Don’t need anything else to do what? For example, don’t need Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS), which Jeff colorfully describes as a “carbon sucking” technology, to meet CO2 targets, “climate goals”? While Jeff mocks Smith’s CCS process as a costly “carbon sucking” machine, in its place, the APP advances a “pragmatic carbon strategy” using vegetation to do the “sucking”.
That’s an old argument that Canada need not do anything to reduce emissions as Canada’s forests are currently sufficient to offset the country’s carbon dioxide emissions in order to achieve the climate goals. In fact, in an X reply to me, Rath advised that he is being political, saying, “You really need to internalize that we are attempting to reach out to the voters we need in the middle”. If the APP believes that such an argument will satisfy anybody who goes along with the climate change scam and perhaps bring some on the left in support of the independence cause, they are fooling themselves. Natural Resources Canada, for example, doesn’t buy that argument, in fact, claims that Canada’s managed forests have become carbon sources, releasing more carbon into the atmosphere than they are accumulating, due to factors like wildfires, insect outbreaks, and harvesting. https://natural-resources.canada.ca/climate-change/forest-carbon
With the reference on page 24 to “Research and Monitoring: Partner with institutions like the University of Alberta to monitor soil and biomass carbon stocks, refining practices based on site-specific data. Use technologies like remote sensing for accurate monitoring the environment and tracking towards goals”, I have the impression that some woke grifter academics from the University of Alberta wrote this section on a “pragmatic carbon strategy”. Their names should be revealed.
This whole notion of promoting a ‘natural carbon sucking’ approach should be abandoned. This section, “Sustainability and the Environment” (which should be renamed to something like “Response to the Climate Change Agena”) started with, “An independent Alberta, free from the constraints of the existing climate agenda, could pursue a fulsome environmental strategy, aimed at protecting, enhancing and maintaining the natural environment and beauty which all citizens value… a focus on these natural landscapes, plant and animal life without the narrow focus on carbon… driven by local priorities rather than external climate mandates,” and should have ended right there. As well, APP could have talked about the financial implications of bringing the constraints of the climate change agenda to an end with independence, such as repealing Bill C-69 (no more new pipelines), lifting the tanker ban off the B.C. coast, eliminating the oil and gas emissions cap, scrapping the so-called Clean Electricity Regulations, eliminating industrial carbon tax, and abandoning the net-zero car mandate. All 9 of Smith’s demands that Carney “must” meet relate to the globalist climate change scam. And we want an Alberta to remain tied to that scam?
I originally asked why all the busywork of calculating the abundance of different types of plant vegetation in Alberta (grasslands and forests) and their capacity to sequester carbon, when the opening statement talks of being “free from the constraints of the existing climate agenda” and a focus on the environment “without the narrow focus on carbon”?
It turns out that the “Sustainability and the Environment” section with its “pragmatic carbon strategy”, which emphasizes carbon sequestration by forests and grasslands and the promotion of such to provide a “carbon offset”, is tied to the succeeding section, “Alberta’s Sovereign Indigenous People in an Independent Alberta”, whereby “by aligning Indigenous self-determination with Alberta’s environmental strategy, the province can foster a sustainable, equitable future”. Accordingly, an “Integration with Environmental Strategy” on page 27 is described as involving “Indigenous-Owned Environmental Projects”, whereby there will be a “Transfer (of) 1.6 million hectares of land including grasslands and foothills within the traditional indigenous territories for Indigenous-led environmental management including provision for natural carbon sequestration, yielding 0.5–5 Mt C/year.”
P.S. I will have more to say about the “Alberta’s Sovereign Indigenous People in an Independent Alberta” section beginning on page 26 in a separate post. In many ways, I wish these were not part of the draft Fiscal Plan, as they may only create division among those who support the APP’s efforts to advance a referendum on Alberta independence.
Today, July 9, 2025, Jeff Rath made the following X post:
“NOTICE THAT NO ONE HAS ANY SERIOUS CRITICISM OF THE ‘VALUE OF FREEDOM’. THE FULLY COSTED FISCAL PLAN FOR AN INDEPENDENT ALBERTA?
Several have tried – but the numbers are too solid!”
I replied, “The numbers presumably are fine, and wish you had stuck to that, but the parts on “Sustainability (UN Terminology) and the Environment” and “Alberta’s Sovereign Indigenous People in an Independent Alberta” are problematic”.
To which Mr. Rath replied, “You really need to internalize that we are attempting to reach out to the voters we need in the middle. There is nothing ‘problematic’ about anything in that document other than for people who insist on putting ideological purity ahead of independence”. While the APP supposedly is open to and invites feedback on its document,
Feedback can be shared here: https://freesuggestionbox.com/pub/eimpiuc
it is shocking to learn that there is nothing “problematic” in this document, implying don’t bother giving your feedback, especially any criticism. I seriously wonder if this is how my feedback will be treated.